Sunday, December 14, 2008

The Painted Pony Goes Up and Down



Paul became a grandfather last month. RIP Paul Watkins.

28 comments:

agnostic monk said...

hey Col, did you catch the MSNBC show? I thought you would appreciate it at least on some level considering it was the first time I have ever seen one of these mainstream shows actually questioning the "Helter Skelter" theory.

RIP Paul Watkins.

jm30 said...

That show last night was absolutely pitiful. The psychobabble from the Ed Sanders lookalike was bad enough, but the goofy re-enactments took it over the edge. It's the worst mainstream doc I have seen about TLB yet. I DVR'd it as I watched, but the promptly erased it once the show ended.

ColScott said...

I will be blogging it later this week

Brian Davis said...

Col, we'll, at least I will look forward to reading your post about that MSNBC crap that was put out on Sunday night.

JM30, well said ! And those re-enactments were a joke.

And how about the Duetsch, or should I say douche' lady ? OMG !

Agnostic Monk, unless I missed something, which is possible, I didn't see or hear anyone question the Helter Skelter motive.
Was there anyone in particular that did this ?

They seemed to let Bugliosi have free reign.

From what I saw, they were just regurgitating the same old bs that they have been feeding us for years now.

And why did they keep quoting Manson from that Nuel Emmons book ?
Why won't someone quote Manson from actual inteviews he has done ?

I just saw a couple interview's Manson did that I hadn't seen before and in one of them (either with Penny Daniels or Ron Reagan Jr.) Manson clearly said Leno LaBianca was killed over the black book.

Anyway, I agree with JM30, that "doc" was crap.

Just my opinion. Can't wait to hear yours Col.

Thanks.

Brian Davis said...

Also, just stricttly on appearance alone and nothing else, I thought Catherine Share looked pretty good for a 67 year old woman and especially considering the roads that woman has been down.
Just sayin'. LOL
Thanks.

agnostic monk said...

I distinctly remember the narrator asking (re: helter skelter theory) "but was it really true?" The bearded criminologist talked about his doubts. That linda deutsch lady seemed to express with her tone and demeanor that she wasn't necessarily convinced by the motive. I dont recall her exact words but something along the lines of "ehhh, well, I guess it made as much sense as anything else in this case..." Then the film touched on the alternate "get bobby off" theory. I just thought it was interesting in that we don't see a lot of that.

The main thing that stuck out for me though was how old everyone looked.

Brian Davis said...

That's cool, Thanks Monk. And yeah, they have aged. Especially Bugliosi.

Jean Harlow said...

Hi guys...

I liked seeing the old news footage..but could have done without the re-enactments that would have cut the show at least in half...

I'm with you Monk - I thought that the criminologist and Linda Deutsch thought the HS motive was sort of bogus.. but I think that that was what Tex and the girls believed... well at least the girls

Funny how they never mention Bernard Crowe and his shooting do they? hmmm and I'd say that was the kick off not Hinman..

Jean

Brian Davis said...

Hi there Jean ! They left quite a bit of significant facts out of that MSNBC doc. In addition to leaving out Bernard Crowe, they left out Susan Adkins talking to Ronnie Howard and Virginia Graham.

I may be so far off here that I get blasted from everyone but,
I believe someone or some people came to Manson and told him he had to take out Frykowski over a drug deal. Manson chose Tex because Tex owed him one from the Crowe incident. He chose the girls he liked the least to help Tex and used the Helter Skelter crap to convince them to do it.
Leno LaBianca was the target over the black book. All others in the Tate-LaBianca murders were victims of circumstance.

I like the old footage of theses docs,but, that is all I get out of them.

I get much more from the prison interviews Manson has done over the years.

Thanks !

Marliese said...

I picked up on Linda Duetsch shrugging at helter skelter too, kind of so what...whatever it took to get them convicted.

What do you all think of that old clip of CM behind bars with a reporter asking him about the death penalty? Was Charlie really that pathetic?

Marliese said...

The black book...Brian, that's mentioned a lot. But why Rosemary?

Brian Davis said...

Marliese, Hello !

I just believe Rosemary was a victim of circumstance just as Steven Parent was. And as was Sharon Tate, A. Folger, J.Sebring.

Manson seems to have gotten past everything thats ever happened to him in his life except (in his mind) him not getting a fair trial. That has really eaten at him.

I think through the interviews over the years he has used them as his "trials" and has actually told us the motives for the murders.

Heaven said...

I have to agree with the show being rather pitiful...

Didn't they advertise that they were going to have interviews with the killers??

Waving hi to everyone! Hope you're all doing well!

=)

A.C. Fisher Aldag said...

Under CA law, they can't do interviews with the killers. It's not allowed. The best Sirens could do was pay Kenny to lie to them.

This event seems to be an exercise in learning about media accuracy, or the lack thereof. So when they tell you anything, check for yourself. Use your own judgment. The media isn't in it for truth -- they are in it for the advertising dollars.

Marliese said...

We know that California law does not allow interviews with the killers. But interviews were allowed until the early 90's, and so it would have been interesting if there had been footage of something we haven't already heard...for the most part, over and over again.

And now in these recent Catherine Share interviews, she's not saying anything she hasn't already said either. Different show, same Catherine Share stuff. She lived it, she went to prison for her crimes, and if she's not going to really talk...she's very careful, speaking almost more as an observer than a participant, then it's just more of the same.

I found her briefly interesting in the interview she did a few years ago where she returned to the site of Spahn's Ranch. The idea of her returning there was interesting. But again, going back to that land could've been much more revealing than the interview ended up being...

Marliese said...

Brian, hi, I just don't know enough about the mob hit and Leno to understand the theory, so thanks for your reply.

With Manson, Frykowski, drug deals and Tex, what about everything that happened just before that Friday night? Manson being away, meeting his fair Stephanie and bringing her to the ranch, to be greeted with the news of about Bobby etc, couldn't there be something about his resentment and paranoia, the girls needing him to step up, all that frustration? Where did the drug burn hit come from on that particular night? So frykowski was a creep, bad deals etc., but why that night within hours of Charlie showing back up with Stephanie? What set it off?

Happy Christmas...

Heaven said...

Oh I know it's agianst California law, I just thought it was odd that they advertised it only to use actors...

Like Marliese said, they could have used some older interviews. Which is what I thought they were going to do..

The show was just more of the same ole same ole...

=)

Marliese said...

Jm, so true...the Ed Sanders look alike. I kept thinking is that ed sanders, he looks kinda different. lol.
Yes, just goofy and more psychobabble...

Marliese said...

Hi Heaven, it would have been nice, huh.
Speaking of interviews though, with the law being in place since the early to mid 90's, how is it that Dianne Sawyer was able to interview Susan Atkins in 2002...that interview and prison footage that showed up during the Compassionate Release news story? Where had that been for six years?

Heaven said...

Hiya Marliese! I hope you are doing well and staying warm!

That's a very good question...

I don't believe the 2002 interview even aired in 2002..
Here's the interview and at the very beginning Diane said the murders were 37 years ago so that means it aired in 2006

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cwqooUe0wC0

But you do raise a very good question.. Hopefully someone here knows how Diane was allowed to interview Susan in '02..

=)

Brian Davis said...

Marliese, Hi again, I don't know myself details of the possible mob hit theory. I'm just going down these roads because it is what I have actually heard Manson say.
While Manson gives us the reasons why, he won't give the "who" because Manson (he says)isn't a snitch. So we probably will never know those details.

And what set it off for that particular night?
Another good question. And there certainly is plenty of room for speculation there.

Heaven, Hi ! yes, they did advertise hearing from the killers themselves, which is what hooked me to watch it.

And that brings me to AC, Hello there AC, who is certainly right on when she says, "The media isn't in it for truth -- they are in it for the advertising dollars."

I love reading everyones posts !

Heaven said...

Hiya Brian..

How's everything with you?

You're posts are very interesting..
I have always thought that the LaBianca's were possibly a hit too..

I won't ever rule anything out lol

=)

A.C. Fisher Aldag said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
A.C. Fisher Aldag said...

Darn it, there is no way to edit posts, other than delete them.

Asked Heaven: "Hopefully someone here knows how Diane was allowed to interview Susan in '02.."

It requires a court injunction. Which in turn, requires lining the right pockets.

They COULD, however, if they wanted to, do a phone interview, or a written interview through letters. Just no cameras. Too easy to smuggle in weapons, and too much risk of a hostage situation.

Hi, Brian. Yeah, they heard from Charles, who has this to say about interviews:

"It would be like you want to talk about your book, and you're talking about what is in your book, and then they ask you, 'What did you have for breakfast this morning?'"

Me: "Irrelevant?"

Charles: "Yeah. I want to talk about ATWA, about things that have something to do with something something, and they'll keep on asking me the same old questions."

deadwoodhbo said...

Charles: "Yeah. I want to talk about ATWA.Ok all you denfenders of atwa including mr manson what are you doing for the air trees water and animals?Let me see the Great captain Paul Watson leader of the sea shepherd Ramming and disabling the notorious pirate whaler, the Sierra
Shutting down half of the Spanish whaling fleet
Documentation of whaling activities in the Faeroe Islands chronicled in the
BBC documentary Black Harvest
Scuttling half of the Icelandic whaling fleet and whale processing station
Scuttling of the Norwegian whaling vessels Nybraena and Senet
Confronting and opposing Japan's illegal whaling in Antarctica shall i go on?
So to all you defenders of awta what are you doing to help the world become a better place?i mean how are you all earning those grey hairs your so proud of?
I dont think anyone of you has ever stood up for animal rights
OH me what am i doing? well i just became friends with my canadian hero Paul Watson and may 2009 im heading of to save the whales on the great Farley Mowat but hey whats that compared to all you hard working awta team.
ATWA team pull up your socks and do something constuctive to help the animals and enviroment instead of talking lies about ME! behind my back .

FrankM said...

Hey, the blog just woke up.

Deadwood, do I take it you consider ramming and disabling ships, scuttling Scandinavian vessels, etc., a laudable activity? I mean, what about all that gas oil and debris you cause to seep into the ocean ....

And Ace, when you say:

Charles: "Yeah. I want to talk about ATWA,

Are you sure you are not putting words into his mouth?

I mean no one else was there, and we only have your word for it ...

No disrespect

Frank

A.C. Fisher Aldag said...

There were a few other people there, Frank, and I'm paraphrasing, since I didn't take notes. He actaully said talk about ATWA, various animals, plants and insects as well. And this conversation segued in many different directions. The point was that the reporters always want to discuss the murders, Charles finds this irrelevant, and therefore he's not giving any more interviews to mainstream media at this time.

I agree with Sea Shepherds' objectives but not their methods, Deadwood. Violence is not the solution. Whaling can be made illegal through international courts, enforced by various sea police including the U.S. Coast Guard, and fined enormously. This would be a much better use of their time than capturing low-level marijuana smugglers. Lobby your governmental leaders for economic sanctions against countries that practice whaling. And yeah, documentation and individual participation is a great start.

What am I doing? At the grass roots level, recycling, saving to purchase a wind turbine and all its accoutrements, organic gardening, testing envoronmentally friendly products, using low-impact home heating, with the long-term goal of promoting same to individuals and families worldwide. As people vote with their pocketbooks, they aren't going to use methods and products that do not function efficiently. On the state level, protesting against nuclear power plants and against the development of the Michigan coastline, which resulted in the NON-violent closing of a dangerous power facility that was leaking radioactive material into our ground water; and the creation of a new county park near a natural animal salt-lick. On the national level, I'm hoping to assist Charles with patenting his Earth-friendly inventions, and making them available for common use. None of this by myself, of course; there are many wonderful folks participating in all these projects.

Flora said...

I'm interested to hear your thoughts on Debra's emergency: http://mansonmysteries.blogspot.com